A swimmer from Podujevo, who asked to move to Pristina because of her child’s health needs, has failed to provide the transfer through the Ministry of Justice. After the refusal, it addressed fair courts and then the Constitutional Court, which declared its request unacceptable.
The signal newspaper reportedly refers to the case, Kli242/25, where the forger, identified by the Constitutional Court with the initials Saranda Rexhepi, had disputed ruling No. 191/25, April 14, 2025, of the Ministry of Justice.
Noterja had requested transfer from Podujevo to Pristina or appointment to one of the free swimming positions in the capital.
According to her claims, the request was made due to particular family circumstances, as her child needed specialized therapies, which, she thought, were accessible only to Pristina.
She had stressed that she was the child’s only primary nurse and that the move would facilitate the fulfillment of family responsibilities.
The justice ministry rejected the request
The Ministry of Justice had initially rejected the request for territorial transfer, while later had rejected notary application in the public competition for free positions in Pristina.
The Ministry’s reasoning was that the legislation in force for notary does not provide procedure for transfer or reamplifying of persons who are currently exercising notary duties.
Disgusted with that decision, the swimmer had filed charges in administrative conflict at the Constitutional Court in Pristina.
It had also called for delaying the execution of decisions for the appointment of other candidates in free positions.
However, the Constitutional Court had refused the request for postponement, while the verdict was also confirmed by the Court of Appeals.
Noterja claimed discrimination, violation of constitutional rights
After these developments, the swimmer addressed the Constitutional Court, claiming violations of guaranteed rights with the Constitutions and the European Convention on Human Rights.
She claimed that the Justice Ministry’s decision was arbitrary, unreasonable enough and that the child’s best interest had not been taken into account.
The offender also demanded that because of the child’s exceptional family circumstances and health needs, he be exempted from having to depletion regular legal means.
The Constitution announced a premature request
The Constitutional Court found that the procedure regarding the main indictment was still under way at the Constitutional Court in Pristina.
According to the Constitution, rejection of the demand for temporary measures and length of procedures do not testify that regular legal means are ineffective.
For this reason the Court estimated that the request was premature, since no legal means had been exhausted.
As a result, the request was declared unacceptable, while the provisional demand was rejected as without any consideration.
The Constitutional Court did not decide whether the Justice Ministry’s refusal was legal or whether the notary was violated of constitutional rights, as the main issue remains under consideration before regular courts.
The signal where the truth speaks before the news!
/Gazeta Sinjali/
Source Layer: Signal